According to The Boston Globe, U.S. military strategists have “learned the limits of force in Iraq and Afghanistan,” and have begun “rewriting decades-old military doctrine to place humanitarian missions on par with combat.”

Pentagon officials and military commanders have said humanitarian plans are being used to regain the trust of the international community and entice new allies.

Past humanitarian efforts in Iraq have been somewhat successful, but at times, results and action have not kept up with intentions. General instability and inconsistent humanitarian work have also stymied efforts.

Funding complicates matters, as well. The Pentagon has committed large sums of money to weapons, but the next president faces the challenge of allocating resources to humanitarian efforts, as well.

The U.S. military has been praised for its past humanitarian efforts in Pakistan and Indonesia after natural disasters, and some feel that altruism is the best way to build and maintain a positive relationship with international Muslim communities.

Others worry that without changes to the way military spending is dealt with by the government, a more humanitarian approach to foreign policy will never get off the ground.

The Boston Globe reports that the U.S. Defense Department has begun to recognize the importance of “so-called soft power,” with renewed emphasis on humanitarian missions. The shift is a culmination of U.S. efforts to regain the trust of the international community, and potentially win new allies.

In January 2008, a study was released that “sampled perceptions of humanitarian action among Iraqis at the community level,” regarding the success of humanitarian efforts in Iraq. The findings indicated “significant gaps” between intention and action, reported Relief Web.

In December 2004, an article on the Medecins San Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) Web site addressed the “confusion surrounding the humanitarian symbol today.” Problems arose when combat tactics were presented as humanitarian operations by governments and aid workers.

In July 2003, when President Bush announced the deployment of 2500 marines to the coast of Liberia, the Heritage Foundation questioned whether the situation would mimic the disastrous situation in Somalia in the 1990s. The lack of an “enforceable peace settlement” can lead to unpredictable humanitarian missions, said the Foundation.

Camp Lemonier, located 10 miles north of Somalia, is the only U.S. military base in Africa. Marines at the camp are largely focused on humanitarian missions, involving “vaccinating livestock, repairing schools and giving medical training,” according to CNN.

In April 2008, a Politico article asserted that defense spending would require significant attention from the next president. Upcoming Pentagon purchases are “projected to cost more than anticipated,” which could lead to “cuts to other coveted defense programs,” said the article.

Blogger Daniel Drezner asserts that humanitarianism will not take off unless congress is given more influence over foreign policy operations. The armed forces “don’t want this responsibility. They’re stepping up because no other agency possesses either the resources or the willingness to act,” writes Drezner.

A March 2006 editorial in the Christian Science Monitor expressed confidence in the ability of humanitarian assistance to “change public opinion favorably toward the United States.” The American response to Indonesia’s tsunami victims and to the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan were particularly well received by Muslim populations, said the editorial.